B.Gokulanathan, v. The Inspector General Of

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Dated: 24.10.2017

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.SELVAM and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.KALAIYARASAN Writ Petition No.17618 of 2014 B.Gokulanathan ... Petitioner vs.

1.The Inspector General of Registration Santhome High Road Chennai-28 2.The Joint Sub-Registrar of Registration-IV Kancheepuram Kancheepuram District 3.Muthukrishnan 4.D.Manickarajan 5.Selvanayaki 6.Vijayalakshmi 7.Sakunthala 8.D.Prabhakar ... Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 to take appropriate action for cancelling the sale deed in document No.1539/2008 on the file of the 2nd respondent in terms of the Circular No.67 dated 03.11.2011 issued by the first respondent in so far it relates to S.F.No.179/1, T.S.No.7, Block No.25, Old Paimash No.170, 173 at No.136, Adambakkam Village, Tambaram Taluk, Kancheepuram District measuring an extent of 4384 Sq.meters. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Kamadevan For Respondents : Mr.R.Vijayakumar, Addl.Govt.Pleader for R1 and R2 No appearance for R3 to R8.

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by A.SELVAM,J.) This Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to direct the respondents 1 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

and 2 to cancel the sale deed (Document No.1539/2008) in pursuance of Circular No.67 dated 03.11.2011 issued by the first respondent, by way of issuing a Writ of Mandamus.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has advanced his arguments on the basis of the averments made in the petition.

3. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 and 2 has submitted a copy of Circular No.20.10.2017, issued by the Government of Tamil Nadu, wherein, it is clearly stated that Circular No.67 dated 03.11.2011 has already been withdrawn.

4. Considering the above said factual circumstances, the relief sought for in the Writ Petition has become infructuous. However, a representation has been made on the side of the Writ Petitioner for giving necessary direction to the respondents 1 and 2 to consider the representation dated 18.06.2014 and to that extent, this court is inclined to pass the following order:- In fine, this Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. However, the 2nd respondent is directed to look into the representation dated 18.06.2014 alleged to have been given by the Writ Petitioner and dispose of the same, as early as possible, after giving due notice to the parties concerned. No costs.

nvsri sd/ ASSISTANT REGISTRAR /TRUE COPY/ SUB-ASSISTANT REGISTRAR To 1.The Inspector General of Registration Santhome High Road Chennai-28 2.The Joint Sub-Registrar of Registration-IV Kancheepuram Kancheepuram District +1CC to MR.S.KAMADEVAN Advocate SR.NO.75195 Writ Petition No.17618 of 2014 GJII MK:20/11/2017 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/